By last fall, 160,000 people had enrolled. But the class was not particularly inspiring — at first. One student complained that the software allowed students to try each problem only once. “I realized, ‘Wow, I’m setting students up for failure in my obsession to grade them,’ ” says Thrun. So he changed the software to let students try and try until they got it right. He also paid attention to the data, and he had a lot of it. When tens of thousands of students all got the same quiz problem wrong, he realized that the question was not clear, and he changed it. And the students themselves transformed other parts of the class, building online playgrounds to practice what they were learning and even translating the class into 44 languages.

Meanwhile, Thrun had told his Stanford students they could take the class online if they didn’t want to attend lectures. More than three-quarters of them did so, viewing the videos from their dorms and participating as if they were thousands of miles away. Then something remarkable happened. On the midterm, the Stanford students scored a full letter grade higher on average than students had in previous years. They seemed to be learning more when they learned online. The same bump happened after they took the final.

Still, the Stanford students were not the stars of the class. At the end of the semester, not one of the course’s 400 top performers had a Stanford address.

The experience forced Thrun to rethink everything he knew about teaching, and he built Udacity upon this reordering of the universe. Unlike Coursera, another for-profit MOOC provider — which has partnered with dozens of schools, including Stanford, Princeton and, more recently, the University of Virginia — Udacity selects, trains and films the professors who teach its courses. Since it launched in January, Udacity has turned down about 500 professors who have volunteered to teach, and it has canceled one course (a math class that had already enrolled 20,000 students) because of subpar quality.

Right now, most MOOC providers do not make a profit. That can’t continue forever. Udacity will probably charge for its classes one day, Thrun says, but he claims the price will stay very low; if not, he predicts, a competitor will come along and steal away his students.

Udacity does not offer a degree, since it’s not an accredited university. Students get a ceremonial certificate in the form of a PDF. Grades are based on the final exam. Students who choose to take the final for Udacity’s computer-science course at an independent testing center (for $89) can get transfer credits from Colorado State University–Global Campus, an online-only school.

Getting more colleges to accept transfer credits would be nice, but in the longer term, Udacity aims to cut out the middleman and go straight to employers. This week, Udacity announced that six companies, including Google and Microsoft, are sponsoring classes in skills that are in short supply, from programming 3-D graphics to building apps for Android phones.

Meanwhile, about 3,000 students have signed up for Udacity’s employer-connection program, allowing their CVs to be shared with 350 companies. Employers pay Udacity a fee for any hires made through this service. So far, about 20 students have found work partly through Udacity’s help, Thrun says. Tamir Duberstein, 24, who studied mechanical engineering in Ontario, recently got two job offers after completing six Udacity courses. He took one of the offers and now works at a software company in San Francisco.

Still, it will be a long time before companies besides high-tech start-ups trust anything other than a traditional degree. That’s why hundreds of thousands of people a year enroll in the University of Phoenix, which most students attend online. Says University of Phoenix spokesman Ryan Rauzon: “They need a degree, and that isn’t going to change anytime soon.”

MOOCs vs. the College Campus

To compare my online experience with a traditional class, I dropped into a physics course at Georgetown University, the opposite of a MOOC. Georgetown admitted only 17% of applicants last fall and, with annual tuition of $42,360, charges the equivalent of about $4,200 per class.

The university’s large lecture course for introductory physics accommodates 150 to 200 students, who receive a relatively traditional classroom experience — which is to say, one not designed according to how the brain learns. The professor, who is new to the course, declined to let me visit.

But Georgetown did allow me to observe Physics 151, an introductory class for science majors, and I soon understood why. This class was impressively nontraditional. Three times a week, the professor delivered a lecture, but she paused every 15 minutes to ask a question, which her 34 students contemplated, discussed and then answered using handheld clickers that let her assess their understanding. There was a weekly lab — an important component missing from the Udacity class. The students also met once a week with a teaching assistant who gave them problems designed to trip them up and had them work in small groups to grapple with the concepts.

The democratization of education has arrived in the form of these moocs. The new mooc wave is a boon for education. For too long too many institutions have been charging too much!

However, there is a distinct lack of coverage on what is going on in the mooc scene across the pond. iversity, for example, are exploding ( https://iversity.org/courses ). They have 3 courses where you can get ECTS credits-credits that are interchangeable between in european universities. exciting times.

Yet college costs are through the room, while competing countries get very low cost education and even Microsoft has given out source code and opportunities (e.g. training H1Bs, "How Microsoft Conquered China" (article from 2007) and plenty of others.

They say it is a "choice" - well, no degree = no job. Why do the people who say "choice" clam up when asked for details, since a minimum wage job will NEVER allow the time needed to get the money to pay for college with cash.

Even teachers, who pay through the teeth, see starting salaries that do not allow them to live or pay back debt.

They say government needs to get out of the way, except private industry demands people with degrees relevant to the field. Colleges see this and know that people have no alternative. The result is grossly inflated prices. That, not government involvement, is the 'free market'. Now look up how much taxpayer-funded subsidy is given to colleges, private industry, etc, and let's really talk about government interference, corporate welfare, why students who want to improve their lives in good faith get the short stick while everyone else can get forgiveness.

Not just college; many high schools in Florida use online training to avoid hiring teachers, or even when they don't have sufficient certified kids for the AP courses to justify contracting an AP teacher. Single girl in my personal son's graduating class took almost all of her Senior year classes online (only it was thru FL virtual school which is an unqualified catastrophe! Terrible system, confusing, inferior materials, not user-friendly or even well prepared). -Dario from http://www.primeblog.us

"The purported reason was to block the anti-Muslim film trailer that was inciting protests around the world." see more... Isn't it amazing how in 2013 these countries still want to control their people through the means of religion... I don't see where in the Qu'ran it mentions thou shalt have the power to veto watching films. ;)

The undergraduate learning experience is not just about pure academics. The growth of a student as a positive and productive member of society during the undergraduate experience is equally important to the growth of their intellect. For most students, the undergraduate experience exposes them to all the challenges of life in a safe environment. They will interact with people who are vastly different from different cultures and discover that we aren’t all that different.

However, I am positive about the evolution of online education. It is certainly not a complete replacement for the traditional higher education experience. For the undergraduate student, the optimal model will need to have the right balance of an online and in classroom experience. That model does not exist, but I believe it will be developed over the next 5 to 10 years and become the new tradition.

Before addressing the article I decided to look up the word college. What does college mean, I asked? It seems that there is no meaning other than a place one goes to learn something after one has completed other education. But, a college is more than that. It is a place where like minded people - professors work. They in turn teach people who want to know what the teacher knows about that which the student wants to know. That at least seems to me to be what a college is.

There have been correspondence or what are now called on-line courses for years. Learning in a solitary environment is great for some, but not for most. A college provides motivation to students. It does so by providing an environment where learning is held in high regard and then again there is the threat of a failing grade and being asked to leave - a motivation in its own right. Now we all know that some students do not take all this high regard stuff seriously, but that in no way diminishes the environment fostered by a college.

It seems to me, that if one is highly motivated and well trained in basic academic skills, then on-line is fine. In fact, just send that person to a good library and turn him/her loose. The person will walk out well versed in that which interests them, but for most - me included - the rich environment where learning is held in high regard was and is the stimulus that propelled me to gain the little knowledge that I have.

Additionally, a college fosters a sense of curiosity. The professor challenges and the nuances conveyed in verbal presentations, queries, and give and take occurs in a good class. Does the same occur when taking an on-line course? Does an on-line course foster that sense of grasping a concept or bit of knowledge? Do students in on-line courses say to the computer as a student can say to the professor: Oh, I get it!

This article, like almost all coverage of online learning, misses the timeline of the revolution in online education. MOOCs are the latest rage and get lots of press because of the connection to elite institutions. The quote "3 in 10 college students report taking at least one online course, up from 1 in 10 in 2003 — but afterward, most are no better off than they would have been at their local community college." is indicative of the pervasive, shallow understanding of the history. Right now more than 6 million college students are enrolled in fully online, credit-bearing online courses. That is more than one in three of every college student in the country. And these students ARE getting college credit, unlike the students enrolled in MOOCs. Tell me, why is it that the author believes that real college credit is inferior to a MOOC certificate that, despite the hoopla, is unrecognized by the elite institution that provided it when it comes to offering college credit? This is the persistent story of online education. The revolution already happened - online learning has already become part of the mainstream of higher education. But until the Ivies get involved (and suddenly "invent" what has already been successfully invented) the work of the last 20 years goes unnoticed. Its a shame. see http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/index.asp for some actual insight into online education.

Where can I find more information about this 2011 Science journal study or a detailed list of the practices utilized in these MOOC courses that seems to be so effective?

Also, what is the point of the universities partnering with and investing in MOOCs if they're not giving college credit? It seems one-sided in that the MOOC gets the prestige of being "involved" with these universities, but is being mocked as not deserving of the credits. So, I'm left confused.

Not just college; many high schools in Florida use online courses to avoid hiring teachers, or when they don't have enough qualified kids for AP classes to justify hiring an AP teacher. One girl in my son's graduating class took almost all of her Senior year classes online (only it was thru FL virtual school which is an unqualified disaster! Terrible system, confusing, poor materials, not user-friendly or well organized).

Any advancement that allows more students to access education should be applauded. MOOCs can provide learning opportunities to those who might not be able to pursue a traditional college degree program.

However, there are key differences between MOOCs and online degree programs offered by colleges and universities that any student considering these options should know. The biggest difference is that most MOOCs do not result in college credit. While some institutions offer certificates upon MOOC completion, most cannot be applied toward a college degree program.

Also, many colleges and universities foster faculty engagement, provide small class sizes, offer student support services, and have 24-hour tech support. These advantages are often crucial to meeting student needs and improving student success. You can’t find these factors in MOOCs today. For now, the benefits of MOOCs lie in their accessibility and low cost. It’s important to note this distinction as buzz continues to build around MOOCs and they’re compared to online degree programs.

@KooDooZ What is your expertise on why the Pakistani government shut down access to YouTube. Maybe they had good security reasons.

I am torn between agreeing and disagreeing.

Isn't drawing new insights (understanding) from reams of data they publish whole point about security ?

In other words, doesn't understanding come at all levels of maturity? Could this be deeper or more nuanced levels of understanding, which then allows you to adjust what you measure, monitor, manage, and control?

@readyforthenet - and at the sheer cost involved, which has gone up between 439 and 520% since 1982 (depending on source), students can never find themselves, contribute, or do anything else in the end.

@harvk5 - colleges will shift online to save money. Instructors will get more students because that has more value to the school, even if the instructor can't give the students the needed level of help. So much for that being the reason why costs are so high, so the instructors can give devoted help. And instructors are not taking the bulk of the revenue as take-home pay...

You are right online exists for the last 20 years mainly by for profits to make money .Now 6-6.5 million took at least one online course .

Even state universities are after money. They charge the same fee for online while cost is only 1/10 of the f2f.

I am the great follower of online for the last 20 years. Sloan Consortium could not make online famous in 20 years as much as Coursera made in 4 months. Shame . VISION . I know Sloan Consortium very well I visited them at Babson campus too .

Because of you old onliners , veterans , for profits, online name was stained, therefore elite universities could not go into it . But inspite of that. MIT set up a long range plan in 2001 to start OCW. Now MIT has 100,000,000 students and customers around the world . MIT declared online in December 2011 earlier than anybody . They appealed to the world not to the USA. First course has been taken by 15 % Americans rest is all foreigners

ONLINE can be useful only if there is demand by millions , that requires brand name for the world. Now there are 1,300 colleges offering online courses at $ 1,500 per course .

Now MIT, Harvard, Stanford will be very successful in NEW ONLINE = NOL

conquering the world with 1 billion students with quality + small fee ( not free ) .

The old onliners, veterans caused USA to lose 20 years from nice online learning . Today many of you try to critisize NOL . You will not be successful. No one can make monees of $ 1 billion a year. You know who they are .

I laugh when you say " ...already been invented successfully " and you know now it has gone unnoticed 20 years . It is a shame . One company made it noticeable in 4 months .